Chapter 1 Introduction

Green space can be defined as an open area of natural vegetation set apart for recreational or aesthetic purposes embedded within an urban environment (Taylor and Hochuli (2017)), which for this study is the Greater London Area. There is a large volume of research indicating the social, economic and health benefits of good access to green spaces (Zhou and Parves Rana (2012), De Ridder et al. (2004), Douglas, Lennon, and Scott (2017)). The importance of this is recognised in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals by Goal 11 ‘Sustainable Cities and Communities’ (Choi et al. (2016)). This study illustrates that spatial variation exists within demographic groups across London as a whole and within sub-divisions of London. This study also proposes that inequalities in access to green spaces exist between these demographic groups, this reflects similar trends in other UK cities (Comber, Brunsdon, and Green (2008)). This has important implications for planning professionals both in London and elsewhere.

Planning professionals can use this and other research to understand why these spatial variations exist and implement policies to improve the equity of access to green space across all demographic groups. This study examines quality of green space access at the ward level, and therefore potential interventions can be focused on small areas, whereby the access to green space could be significantly improved upon. Previously suggested policies included prioritising areas of poor access for future development of green spaces, and improving availability of safe and appealing walking and cycling routes to green spaces (Dai (2011)). It is important to note that the benefits of green spaces vary not just with their availability but also with their quality and their use (Zhang et al. (2017)). For example, a public football pitch will bring different benefits than a public woodland or community garden.

This study aims to model the statistical relationship between key demographic and health variables and green space access in London. The success of the proposed models will be evaluated across London as a whole and at a more local scale in North, East, South and West London in order to understand if similar patterns are present at different scales and in different regions of the city. The definition of green space used includes parks, green corridors, outdoor sports fields, allotments, and cemeteries. Variables of average income, life expectancy, wellbeing, age and ethnicity were incorporated into regression models to act as predictors of green space in ward. These variables have been proven correlated with access to green space in other study areas. For example, a study from Astell-Burt et al. (2014) examined whether low-income neighbourhoods have the least green space, and found that green space availability was substantially lower in boroughs of Australian cities with a higher percentage of low-income residents. This study proposes that a similar pattern exists in London, as those areas close to green space such as Hampstead and Richmond in London are often highly desirable Hur, Nasar, and Chun (2010) and therefore have inflated house prices (Smith (2010)). Heynen, Perkins, and Roy (2006) found that areas that have had enhanced green space development, such as Stratford in East London, “unintentionally increase adjacent residential property values” and “drive out residents of lower socio-economic status.” A further example of the correlation proposed is present in a study by Mitchell and Popham (2008) which concluded that in areas showing lower than average life expectancy due to income deprivation, the difference from average was smaller in areas with good access to greenspace compared to those who have poor access.

Inequality in access to green space between different ethnicities has been shown in literature. A study of the spatial distribution of quality of green space access between different ethnicities in Leicester, UK by Comber, Brunsdon, and Green (2008) found that the Indian population had 26.3% less access to green space than the white population, with a host of other inequalities also present. This is important for policymakers to consider when seeking to address health inequalities, and potentially improve the equity of provision of green space between ethnic groups.